the center of gravity well below the water line which is necessarily a good thing.

You know, its funny you say that because I was just about to begin preparing a post about how I like the design but Im concerned it doesnt lower the center of gravity enough. While we can say that we are not concerned with oceanic-level swells, given the bergstead will just submerge itself to aviod the bad weather, I fear even smaller crests such as a 4-6 foot swell will cause problems such as seen in the now infamous Equadorian float.

My reason for stating this is that, while reducing the center of gravity will improve the metacentric height (MH), which is a function not only of its center of gravity but also its buyancy point. Typically, the “higher” the MH – the longer the distance between the center of gavity (below) and the metacenter of the structure (above) – the larger the rolling period, or the longer it takes the structure to react to waves.

In essence, a higher MH means that those aboard are tossed around less. In normal ships a very high MH can a bad thing because the ship reacting slowly to waves can make it suceptible to being swamped. Given that a bergstead will be watertight, this is not an issue – though were a high MH to be built into a bergstead, you may have to rethink having an open upper deck – some plexiglass covering or some sort of other protection might be better, so waves dont wash over the structure and take away all your plants and deck chairs (and children).

Now, my first impression of bergsteads would be one where the majority of the structue was submerged at all times to create a very high MH, and thus incredible stability. You dont ever see videos of actual icebergs being tossed around back and forth because so much of their bulk is underwater, creating that MH.

While your inverted pyramid will help this, and the baffles will also effectively lower the center of gravity, raising the MH, I wish to suggest three alternatives. They will not be very cheap, but they wont be hugely expensive either. If it is something you choose to incorporate into your design, it might raise the overall price by as much as 50% – I Imagine going from 250k to 375k.

First is the cheapest, and nothing you have not already thought of. Simply add some seriously large stabilizing fins. As the baffes effectively lower the center of gravity of a structure further than a solid keel would, having stabilizing fins would also effectively lower it due to the resistence they offer when moving through the water. As a wave attempts to force the structure into a roll, the stabilizing fins are forced to move as well and they resist the movement reducing roll period, and increasing stability. To make them so effective that roll was essentially eliminated, though, would require them to be long enough so that the central pivot point (where the friction of the fins offset the fact that the center of gravity were above them) were far below the bergstead. Imagine having Stabilizing going into the water at a 3:1 ratio of fin length to structure height. Thus, with a 5M tall structure, you would want 15M long fins, but as they would only need to be hefty enough to hold up to the water-drag when the structure rolled, it would not be too expensive. They could be made with anything from rebar with vinyl to a fibreglass form to hardened plastics, whatever. This solution would be used in places where the water depth was such that the structure could still submerge fully to avoid storms, and budget did not allow the following solution.

Second would be attach your inverted pyramid keel to the bottom of the bergstead via a 1:1 lheight structure. The connecting structure could be anything strong and resillient enough – steel grids, concrete collums, freaking carbon fibre struts, whatever. But with a 5M tall bergstead you would want a 5M tall structure attached to the bottom and then the extra keel attached below that. This would effectivly lower the center of gravity and raise the MH that roll would be minimal if not eliminated in most conditions. This solution would be completed in ares where the water depth did not allow for full submersion with the large fins, and where budget allows for the increase.

Third, of course, would simply be an amalgamation of the two above, such as shortening the height of the keel-connecting structure, but adding fins as well. Not too hard to imagine where and when it would be used, or how it would be implimented.

Of course, the design as you have it now might solve all the problems, but I do not think it will. I think a solution like I have listed above, or something as yet offered up, will have to be adopted for a real-world small bergstead such as we are proposing.

it is supposed to be able to become completely water-tight and fill balast tanks with water so that it will sink itself a few feet under the surface in the event that a storm or extremely rough sea conditions are presented to its location.

if you use ropes to attache the keel rather than a rigid structure, you gain no real benefits.

Imagine grasping the string of a yo-yo in your fist with your thumb up, so that the yo-yo is hainging with the string going out the bottom of your fist. Now turn your fist so your thumb is pointing towards a wall. The weight barely has any effect on your hand moving from one position to the next.

Now imagine holding attaching the yo-yo to the end of a stiff but light wire or rod or dowel, and holding it the same way, with a fist, thumb pointing up, wire going out the bottom of your fist with the yo-yo at the bottom. Now turn your fist so that your thumb is pointint towards a wall. The yo-yo being connected to your hand via a rigid structure makes it much more difficult to move your hand from one position to the next.

By having the two connected by a rigid connector, they remain one integral structure, and the amount of energy required to move it from its natural position (weight hagning down) is much greater, making it less likely to be disturbed.

let’s stop. let’s just stop right now with all of this. we need to take a much different approach. what are we really selling? its not the structure that we’re trying to sell. its not the technology. we need to sell the experience. dont just sell the steak – sell the sizzle. lets put the bergs, and the pyramids, and the stabilizer fins, and the yadda yadda all aside for a little and come up with some kind of picture of what life will soon be like for families who want to live a frontier lifestyle on the sea.

when it comes to single family seasteads, i envision these 12-25 miles off the coast. i imagine that the inhabitants will get to and fro, initially by boat, as the popularity grows some owners may have their own helicopters or just use a service that provides heli transport. but the sales pitch HAS to be SEXY as all hell. i picture a sales promo video that features a hot family in a liberator speed boat going 110 miles per hour (hair whipping around). on their way to a 2-week vacation at their “second home”. once they get there what will it be like? what comes next? they arrive and pull up to the garage door which is already opening when daddy swings the powerful rumbling boat around and backs it inside. milf mommy gazes over and smiles. let the luxury begin! a beautiful composite deck leads to a full-size hatch door. as they unload their bags, they notice the fresh smell of treated air that awaits them inside. decadent design work. shimmering light fixtures. finely painted walls with accents and a few murals depicting scenes of glory – like Washington crossing the Delaware River.

the first year they were the only family to have a ss out here. but now there are already 12 other families moored nearby. the smaller second boat inside the garage will provide access for kids to play together. the parents agree to take turns hosting the children and allowing each other time alone together.

some nights they invite dozens of people and have parties. RAGING wild parties with obnoxiously loud music, people puking in toilets. beer pong. a fight or two. dancing. stripping. after a day or so the other people all leave and the kids come back from their playtime. family. together again. they watch tv together. tell each other stories. tell each other how they never want to go back. let’s go up and lay out on the deck. we’ll try those new chairs. i wanta drink a beer, no i wont drink a beer as long as u smile at me just like that. (*eye twinkle). mmmmmmm sigh. an hour goes by. then your phone beeps. the ss is telling you that a storm is imminent, and the waves are expected to get serious.

ahhhhhh. so u lazily get up and drag the chairs inside. take a look around to make sure everything on the patio is bolted down, and then you go in and close the hatch. you hardly pay attention while the water comes over the windows and the vessel descends.

your 2 weeks is almost over already, so before the storm passes, ur getting packed up and ready to leave it behind.

now im sad. oh well, at least we get to jump in the boat and jet back to shore. what a great time we had. i know you cant wait till we come back!

In the light of that, I don’t see the point of being moored (or anchored) and then submerge during a storm,….the current is still there. If you are dragging anchor and close to shore, no matter if floating or submerged, you will run aground. If you are loosing the anchor you are fucked anyway,…

Also, it is worst to be submerged and moored in a storm than being on the surface. While riding a storm at anchor you shud always keep watch, your GPS position and bearings to fixed shore objects will indicate if you are moving or not (dragging anchor). If you are, you can drop anothor anchor and/or start the engine and try to compensate, and sometimes it works. If this doesn’t work, you will have to re-anchor hoping for a better hold. If this fails too, then you will have to motor out there in the storm,find a spot far from land to heave to and take your chances. Such is the price to pay for not being 500nm away from that storm,…If you are submerged and moored, first of all you got no visual at all of what’s going on around you. You have to rely only on your GPS, and if all the above is happening, what are you gonna do?? Does the bergstead have an engine that can run under water? ’cause if it doesn’t, you’re fucked. How much is that going to cost? How long can you stay under? You need an oxygen supply system. How much is that going to cost? And all that for what?

My oppinion is that it will be much, much cheaper and you will be better off in the long run if you’ll keep that bergstead floating at all times, plant some palm trees on deck, and get a good running engine.

In the light of that, I don’t see the point of being moored (or anchored) and then submerge during a storm,….the current is still there. If you are dragging anchor and close to shore, no matter if floating or submerged, you will run aground. If you are loosing the anchor you are fucked anyway,…

well what you could do, is sink onto the floor,

and then sit out the storm, then float up when it’s safe.

Also, it is worst to be submerged and moored in a storm than being on the surface. While riding a storm at anchor you shud always keep watch, your GPS position and bearings to fixed shore objects will indicate if you are moving or not (dragging anchor). If you are, you can drop anothor anchor and/or start the engine and try to compensate, and sometimes it works. If this doesn’t work, you will have to re-anchor hoping for a better hold. If this fails too, then you will have to motor out there in the storm,find a spot far from land to heave to and take your chances. Such is the price to pay for not being 500nm away from that storm,..

or many miles from shore, where if you drift some tens of kilometers it’ll be okay.

if you’re on the ocean, can probably pick a migratory ocean stream, it’ll likely maintain direction even in case of a storm.

.If you are submerged and moored, first of all you got no visual at all of what’s going on around you.

that’s what windows are for….

You have to rely only on your GPS,

radio frequencies quickly deteriorate underwater,

sonar is much more effective for location tracking, and more importantly determining depth.

and if all the above is happening, what are you gonna do?? Does the bergstead have an engine that can run under water?

er, all boat engine’s run underwater.

though I guess an electrical one would be preferable, as it uses less oxygen.

’cause if it doesn’t, you’re fucked.

I’m sure people would be overjoyed to get laid.

How much is that going to cost?

How long can you stay under? You need an oxygen supply system. How much is that going to cost? And all that for what?

oxygen-supply system is as easy as having a few planted aquariums.

assuming you have sufficient amount of plants and circulation, can stay there indefinitely.

My oppinion is that it will be much, much cheaper and you will be better off in the long run if you’ll keep that bergstead floating at all times, plant some palm trees on deck, and get a good running engine.

ya, the seastead islands, once they get big enough, certainly shall support palm trees and all that, indeed then at least part of them would have to stay above water permanently, though once they get that size, they really will be like an iceberg, and so even a heavy storm would do minimum interference.

In the long-term, I still believe hydro-foils, and anti-gravity drives are our best bet for seastead island propulsion. Though sure engine’s might work *shrugs*, guess main thing is we’d need to improve our energy-gathering abilities.

this is a throwback to one of my first posts ever on the TSI forums – february 2011. it was in my “simple design principle” thread. only the guys who were here at the time would remember, because i wasnt aware how to upload more than 5 pictures – so they were getting rotated out. enjoy:

as you can imagine i got called out on technical grounds pretty quickly. Elspru was the first to acknowledge me, and others followed suit. eventually Ellmer and the rest convinced me that concrete was the building material of choice. not before my lead head left a few people with a bruised ego. PJ is only recently comin back again. thank god. but the troll-face dude hasnt been around for a long time (Ken dont want to hear this but i’d love to trade jabs with that troll-face dude again – i mean come on that shit was fun).

in comparison with the newest Bergstead, this old thing is a total p-o-s. but we got this far on baby steps. finally now the balls rolling just a little bit faster…